[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/BEAM-8543?focusedWorklogId=669788&page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:worklog-tabpanel#worklog-669788
]
ASF GitHub Bot logged work on BEAM-8543:
----------------------------------------
Author: ASF GitHub Bot
Created on: 25/Oct/21 20:54
Start Date: 25/Oct/21 20:54
Worklog Time Spent: 10m
Work Description: lukecwik commented on pull request #15794:
URL: https://github.com/apache/beam/pull/15794#issuecomment-951321731
> LGTM Is this intended to be fixed, or is this planned not to be suppprted
in the future?
I have no intention to resolve BEAM-8543 just associating this PR with it.
Hopefully at some point BEAM-8543 can be addressed for users.
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: github-unsubscr...@beam.apache.org
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
us...@infra.apache.org
Issue Time Tracking
-------------------
Worklog Id: (was: 669788)
Time Spent: 3h 40m (was: 3.5h)
> Dataflow streaming timers are not strictly time ordered when set earlier
> mid-bundle
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: BEAM-8543
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/BEAM-8543
> Project: Beam
> Issue Type: Bug
> Components: runner-dataflow
> Affects Versions: 2.13.0
> Reporter: Jan Lukavský
> Priority: P3
> Time Spent: 3h 40m
> Remaining Estimate: 0h
>
> Let's suppose we have the following situation:
> - statful ParDo with two timers - timerA and timerB
> - timerA is set for window.maxTimestamp() + 1
> - timerB is set anywhere between <windowStart, windowEnd), let's denote that
> timerB.timestamp
> - input watermark moves to BoundedWindow.TIMESTAMP_MAX_VALUE
> Then the order of timers is as follows (correct):
> - timerB
> - timerA
> But, if timerB sets another timer (say for timerB.timestamp + 1), then the
> order of timers will be:
> - timerB (timerB.timestamp)
> - timerA (BoundedWindow.TIMESTAMP_MAX_VALUE)
> - timerB (timerB.timestamp + 1)
> Which is not ordered by timestamp. The reason for this is that when the input
> watermark update is evaluated, the WatermarkManager,extractFiredTimers() will
> produce both timerA and timerB. That would be correct, but when timerB sets
> another timer, that breaks this.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.3.4#803005)
